Operations Engineering Bulletin. Airbus speak for "le problem that may take us some time to feex...."

Just in case you haven't seen photos of the damaged interior ...

Bloody wreck | NEWS.com.au

I would like to know where was the trim (ie CWCG) and what was going on with the fwd/aft transfer of fuel to the THS.

Good job guys. :D You deserve to be praised, not questioned, for you actions.

Im supprised that the media havent reported that all the heavy maintenance on the JQ and QF A330 fleet is carried out in Manilla.

MELKBQF: Perhaps the reason that the media have not bothered with the Manilla maintenance topic, is because most Airbus heavy maintenance performed in Manilla is through Lufthansa Teknik (Sp?).

The F/O was off the flight deck to visit the loo. Apparently suffered a broken arm/wrist and a broken nose (no smart alec comments from the peanut gallery about what may have contributed to the broken wrist!). Hope the F/O (and everyone else) recovers quickly and is back on line ops soon.

TID Edit.

Ndicho Moja: isnt that the same MRO that lockwired the crew oxy closed on a QF group A330 last year?

Qantas hasn't said anything about the cause. The CAT speculation comes from people in here, guilty as charged yer honour, and the laptop speculation comes from elsewhere on the blogosphere.

TID Edit

Perhaps they are the right guys to have when the schiesen hits the oscillator?

Trans Layer, thanks for that, but no I don't think it makes a big difference, anyhow the " engine rollback " theory seems to have been given the attention it deserved ;)

Was'nt the 747 with the oxy bottle problem serviced in avalon ?? ( just while we are finger pointing )

Just had a look at the animation that the ATSB have put on their website. One issue that it highlights is the total unreliability of passenger descriptions of how much altitude was lost during the incident. The other interesting aspect is how much cabin damage was caused by ,what appears in the animation,as a minor pitch down. The actual numbers tell more of a story with the maximum pitch down being -8.1 deg but it wasn't sustained. There are no figures for the g load experienced. Worth a look for those who want more than media drivel.

I wouldn't be surprised if there was an engine rollback as a result of the incident. With negative g's, perhaps all the fuel was at the top of the tanks (and not where the pump inlets are) :}

Too many conspiracy theories here... QF spokespeople were in the dark like everyone else (CAT was only put forward because it seemed like a likely scenario at the time).

Whilst it probably wasn't a laptop or mobile which caused this problem, that's not to say they have never caused problems. Whilst your average laptop might not cause problems, broken ones have been reported to have been interfering with aircraft equipment. Incidentally, even official onboard IFE systems (malfunctioning) have generated problems in unrelated aircraft systems.

As one engineer commented to me today, fly by wire is fine.... when you have an ejector seat. Computers and aircraft will never make a good marriage.

To the person who asked why it took 20 seconds to get the aircraft under control.... What makes you think that was an option? As I understand it, even under direct law, the aircraft is still being controlled by a computer.

Engine "Roll-back"
 

NSEU I would be surprised if the fuel pumps are not inside a surge tank which allows fuel in, but not back out to the tank, to combat your theory about "all the fuel at the top of the tanks". Have had nothing to do with Airbus, so cannot say for sure, however if the pumps are able to be starved of fuel by negative 'g' it would be a backward step from earlier aircraft.

Pro Pilots please excuse my ignorance on this subject but i've been following this thread for a while and there are posts riddling at a possible cause but not fully explaining.

I understand a little on the shielding factor on avionics suites and am somewhat suspicious on a laptop/PDA cause, given the required EMF power to cause such an incident. Is there an possible problem in the 330 and if so why no groundings or AD's.

Sorry for the questions but I haven't been able to get close to an answer and when I do it gets way too cryptic for a clown like me. As an aside,I do trust Qantas pilots and engineers and have faith in their training and ability in the worst of situations and feel the handling of this, again proves that trust is well placed.

Folks, please refrain from identifying the crew concerned, even in jest. This event has drawn a lot of interest, and we believe it is in the best interest of all concerned that all references to crew identity be removed.

TID

....Except for the media (with their usual frenzied attitude to reporting a story) who would expect and give any credibility to a pax when asking how much altitude was lost?

The aircraft was serviced at the Avalon facility HKF, the oxygen cylinder in question was serviced somewhere else. A little bird also told me that the bottle may have been serviced to 4,000psi anyone know if other airlines (besides QF) use that press. QF uses 3,000psi ?

I think in the wash you will find the engines 'rolled back' as a result of an overspeed detection thus the also initial slight rise in altitude

GWN News in WA was still reporting that the aircraft had dropped 8,000 feet on Thursday, after the official facts from the ATSB had been released...not surprising really...